Return to newtlds Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username: RGaetano
Date/Time: Sun, July 9, 2000 at 3:19 PM GMT
Browser: Netscape Communicator V4.04 using Windows NT
Score: 5
Subject: New TLDs - Intellectual Property

Message:
 

 
Q41: Does the start up of a new TLD pose additional risks to intellectual property rights that warrant additional protections?

A41: UDRP (and ultimately court proceedings) constitute sufficient protection.
I would also like to add that I do not understand how and why we moved from the initially envisaged (see White Paper) protection of "famous marks" to the current debate where solutions for "all trademarks worldwide" are proposed.
This attitude is absolutely to be rejected.


Q43: Is the availability of the UDRP and court proceedings as remedies for violations of enforceable legal rights an appropriate element of protection of intellectual-property rights that should apply to all new TLDs? Are there any other protections that should be made available in all new TLDs, regardless of their type?

A43: UDRP (and ultimately court proceedings) constitute sufficient protection of intellectual-property rights in the TLDs where such protection is appropriate.
In some other TLDs (non-commercial, advocacy, ....) intellectual-property rights protection would not be appropriated at all.


Q46: Is exclusion of names appearing on a globally famous trademark list a workable method of protecting such marks from infringement at the present time? Would an exclusion mechanism be approprate in the future?

A46: I have the impression that the whole story of the "famous trademark list" is based on a misunderstanding: there seems to me to be community consensus that such a list should not be managed by ICANN, but not really that such a list should not exist altogether.
The point is that ICANN or the DNSO do not have neither the qualification nor the authority in establishing, managing and enforcing such a list, but provided that such a list exists, is of limited size (100?), is managed by an authoritative and qualified source (WIPO), there should not be any problem for ICANN to refer to it for the grant of additional (exceptional) protection.
In other words, I see this as a problem similar to the definition of a country for the purpose of delegating a ccTLD.
ICANN does not decide who is and who is not a Country (or famous mark), but uses the list provided and managed by ISO (WIPO).

 


Message Thread:


Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy